Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramsiya Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 April, 2019
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 M.Cr.C. No.15032/2019
Ramsiya Sharma Vs. State of M.P.
Gwalior Bench Dated : 12/04/2019
Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri H.D. Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
With consent heard finally.
This is the first application preferred by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. wherein he is apprehending his arrest in a case registered at Crime No.157/2018 at Police Station Ater district Bhind for the offence under Sections 307, 323, 147, 148 and 149 of IPC.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that a cross- case has been registered against the complainant party at the instance of the present applicant because they also alleged to have fired over the present applicant and his brother. Both the parties entered into compromise and therefore, earlier filed applications for settlement by way of M.Cr.C.No.52246/2018 and 52241/2018 but both were withdrawn by the parties because of impact of order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dhruv Singh in Cr.A.No.336/2019. Once the parties intended to settle the matter, therefore, neither custodial interrogation is required nor the plea of tampering with the evidence is available to the investigation/prosecution. Confinement would bring social disrepute and personal inconvenience and chance of settlement of the case would move farther. Learned counsel for the applicant also relied THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 M.Cr.C. No.15032/2019 upon the order dated 08-04-2019 passed in M.Cr.C.No.49404/2018 wherein facing identical fact situation, the said applicant is given the benefit of bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. on his second visit. In such circumstances, he seeks anticipatory bail.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that no case for anticipatory bail is made out. However, on perusal of case diary, he could not point out whether any proceeding under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. was initiated. Therefore, prayed for dismissal of the application.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant as well as fact situation of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I intend to allow this bail application. It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail in case of his arrest on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority/Investigating Officer.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be.
4. The applicant will not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 M.Cr.C. No.15032/2019 during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
(Anand Pathak) Judge Anil* Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA Date: 2019.04.12 15:08:27 +05'30'